Miracle Control

I played a mini tournament with a D&T player at my LGS yesterday. My list is Schonegger's new list but with one needle in the SB over a flusterstorm since I don't have the 3rd.

Game 1 I have a lot of duals in my hand but keep. I force his turn 1 vial and keep killing his creatures until I'm able to play a jace and protect it. He scoops right before the ultimate.

I board out 1 force, 2 counterbalance, 1 counterspell and 1 council's judgement.

I bring in 1 needle, 1 staticaster, 2 wear // tear and 1 containment priest.

Game 2 Ends with me having a mentor, 2 tops and a bunch of tokens. I have brainstorm in hand. He cataclysms and I rebuild and kill him.

I can identify where I could have killed him earlier but didn't. I wasn't punished for it but I won't make the same mistake again.

I want to know about my boarding and whether it was the right mix of cards. Needle was useful as i was able to needle his vials.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by twndomn

http://www.toplevelpodcast.com/the-p...nastery-mentor

31:08

"This card is insane, Karakas is crazy" - Patrick Chapin

I trust Hall of Fame player's insight.

---

It's not loading for me... have a transcript somewhere?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Misersoneof

I played a mini tournament with a D&T player at my LGS yesterday. My list is Schonegger's new list but with one needle in the SB over a flusterstorm since I don't have the 3rd.

Game 1 I have a lot of duals in my hand but keep. I force his turn 1 vial and keep killing his creatures until I'm able to play a jace and protect it. He scoops right before the ultimate.

I board out 1 force, 2 counterbalance, 1 counterspell and 1 council's judgement.

I bring in 1 needle, 1 staticaster, 2 wear // tear and 1 containment priest.

Game 2 Ends with me having a mentor, 2 tops and a bunch of tokens. I have brainstorm in hand. He cataclysms and I rebuild and kill him.

I can identify where I could have killed him earlier but didn't. I wasn't punished for it but I won't make the same mistake again.

I want to know about my boarding and whether it was the right mix of cards. Needle was useful as i was able to needle his vials.

---

don't board out fow but instead do board out all counterbalances. CJ is allright so keep that. You can cut a jace too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mackan

don't board out fow but instead do board out all counterbalances. CJ is allright so keep that. You can cut a jace too.

---

Could anybody link Schoneggers current list please?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 13reaper666

Could anybody link Schoneggers current list please?

---

2 Arid Mesa
4 Flooded Strand
3 Island
1 Misty Rainforest
2 Plains
2 Polluted Delta
1 Scalding Tarn
3 Tundra
3 Volcanic Island
21 land

2 Monastery Mentor
3 Snapcaster Mage
5 creature

4 Brainstorm
1 Council's Judgment
4 Counterbalance
2 Counterspell
1 Entreat the Angels
4 Force of Will
3 Jace, the Mind Sculptor
4 Ponder
4 Sensei's Divining Top
4 Swords to Plowshares
3 Terminus
34 other spells

Sideboard (15)

1 Containment Priest
1 Izzet Staticaster
3 Flusterstorm
3 Pyroblast
1 Rest in Peace
1 Surgical Extraction
3 Vendilion Clique
2 Wear // Tear
15 cards

More details in this article

wohoo

Null Rod + Humility vs MUD!!


Brion, the Unarmed Warrior
Legendary Creature - Giant Warrior
All artifacts lose all abilities.
Artifact creatures have base power and toughness 1/1.
At the beginning of each player's upkeep, Brion, the Unarmed Warrior deals damage to that player equal to the number of artifacts he or she controls.
"Rely on your own skills rather than on clunky and disposable trinkets, and no battle will be impossible to win."
5/5

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Poron

wohoo

Null Rod + Humility vs MUD!!


Brion, the Unarmed Warrior
Legendary Creature - Giant Warrior
All artifacts lose all abilities.
Artifact creatures have base power and toughness 1/1.
At the beginning of each player's upkeep, Brion, the Unarmed Warrior deals damage to that player equal to the number of artifacts he or she controls.
"Rely on your own skills rather than on clunky and disposable trinkets, and no battle will be impossible to win."
5/5

---

You mean the one posted in the shitty card creation thread?

not coming in next expansion?

Ok I retire with this.

First of all, I don't understand why this thread has de-generate into mind reading of a particular user, trying to seek out "wisdom" or comedy.

Second, BBD posted a premium article about GP, the mistakes he felt about playing Miracles, since he himself did not do so well. It's not free, so....

http://www.starcitygames.com/article...-Miracles.html

I just disclose the key points, or the key mistakes.
1. play situational or potentially dead cards.
2. aggressive game plan can backfire.
3. run less than 4 Terminus.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by twndomn

First of all, I don't understand why this thread has de-generate into mind reading of a particular user, trying to seek out "wisdom" or comedy.

Second, BBD posted a premium article about GP, the mistakes he felt about playing Miracles, since he himself did not do so well. It's not free, so....

http://www.starcitygames.com/article...-Miracles.html

I just disclose the key points.
1. don't play situational or potentially dead cards.
2. aggressive game plan can backfire.
3. run less than 4 Terminus.

---

Why run less than 4?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CutthroatCasual

Why run less than 4?

---

It's more like what Not to do. He knew it's a bad idea, but he did it anyway at the GP. Long story short, he MD-ed mentors and 3 Terminus and felt he under-achieved at the GP, hence he wrote about what Not to do.

1. don't play situational or potentially dead cards.

Is he talking about blood moon or something even more situational? There is a lot of post in my local meta so I believe I can justify a single slot to something against them, but I'm not completly convinced that a single blood moon isn't worthwhile in an open meta. I think there is a very strong argument to be made that in a deck with unrivaled card selection there no reason to play 'redundant' cards in a sideboard. I think playing two copies of enchantments with a static effect like RIP and moon is a poor use of sideboard slots because the second one has little to no value. What I really like about Phillip's sideboard is that each card he has multiples of performs well in multiples like blasts and flusterstorms, or are incredibly critical in various matchups like wear//tear or clique.

2. aggressive game plan can backfire.

I think a lot of people are playing mentor wrong and treating it like a 3 drop. Unless I have very good reasons I want to be able to guarantee 2 monks out of it and not put myself in a position where my opponent can play something punishing on their turn. I think the presence of mentor encourages people not to play patiently. It is incredibly tempting to curve top into counterbalance into mentor, but at least in my experience that line is almost always wrong.

3. run less than 4 Terminus.

Do or do not run less than 4 terminus? After playing Phillip's most recent list I've decided to change it and go back to four terminus. My current cut is -1 snapcaster +1 terminus, but I think an argument could be made for shaving a counterspell instead.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moa

1. don't play situational or potentially dead cards.

Is he talking about blood moon or something even more situational? There is a lot of post in my local meta so I believe I can justify a single slot to something against them, but I'm not completly convinced that a single blood moon isn't worthwhile in an open meta. I think there is a very strong argument to be made that in a deck with unrivaled card selection there no reason to play 'redundant' cards in a sideboard. I think playing two copies of enchantments with a static effect like RIP and moon is a poor use of sideboard slots because the second one has little to no value. What I really like about Phillip's sideboard is that each card he has multiples of performs well in multiples like blasts and flusterstorms, or are incredibly critical in various matchups like wear//tear or clique.

---

He's talking about how he regrets maindecking pyroblast (spell pierce and flusterstorm) in the main deck because they are dead for certain matchups and the soft counters are useless after turn 5:

"The gameplan of Miracles is to drag the game out as long as it takes until you've established complete control, and then find a way to win somehow afterward. Cards like Flusterstorm, Daze, and Spell Pierce get worse and worse as the game progresses, they are only truly good in the first few turns. Yet Miracles is trying to drag the game out longer and longer, which means that these cards go directly against your gameplan. If you're trying to push the game past turn 10, keep away from situational cards that stop being relevant after turn 5."

I agree to a certain extent but I think its just more metagaming (he mentioned he faced belcher, punishing jund and maverick which pyroblast was bad against). If you expect a meta full of storm, sneak and show or miracles, I would rather have 2 spell pierces over 2 swords to plowshares, but swords to plowshares is more useful in more matches so I personally run 4 of those and 0 spell pierce.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ticalstal

He's talking about how he regrets maindecking pyroblast (spell pierce and flusterstorm) in the main deck because they are dead for certain matchups and the soft counters are useless after turn 5:

"The gameplan of Miracles is to drag the game out as long as it takes until you've established complete control, and then find a way to win somehow afterward. Cards like Flusterstorm, Daze, and Spell Pierce get worse and worse as the game progresses, they are only truly good in the first few turns. Yet Miracles is trying to drag the game out longer and longer, which means that these cards go directly against your gameplan. If you're trying to push the game past turn 10, keep away from situational cards that stop being relevant after turn 5."

I agree to a certain extent but I think its just more metagaming (he mentioned he faced belcher, punishing jund and maverick which pyroblast was bad against). If you expect a meta full of storm, sneak and show or miracles, I would rather have 2 spell pierces over 2 swords to plowshares, but swords to plowshares is more useful in more matches so I personally run 4 of those and 0 spell pierce.

---

Swing and a miss then I guess.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moa

2. aggressive game plan can backfire.

I think a lot of people are playing mentor wrong and treating it like a 3 drop. Unless I have very good reasons I want to be able to guarantee 2 monks out of it and not put myself in a position where my opponent can play something punishing on their turn. I think the presence of mentor encourages people not to play patiently. It is incredibly tempting to curve top into counterbalance into mentor, but at least in my experience that line is almost always wrong.

---

The whole point of playing Mentor is to be quicker. If you're going to try and go wide, ETA is just better. Yes, ETA requires you to "top deck" it whereas Mentor can be casted for just 3 mana, but he then requires you to have backup instants/sorceries. If you cast him with nothing in hand, good luck winning. Whereas if you cast ETA at instant speed, you make 3 tokens and have a really good shot at winning.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mackan

don't board out fow but instead do board out all counterbalances. CJ is allright so keep that. You can cut a jace too.

---

Thanks for the advice, I'll try that next time.

i'm surprised he doesn't like Vendilion Cliques, preferring meddling mages instead.

it's been consistently an all-star for me against combo and especially mirrors.

He claimed Meddling Mage is better in the matchups you bring it in. His specific example was Sneak and Show where he says it can stop Boseju + Show and Tell on turn 2. I think he chose those numbers because he was hard pressed to come up with a scenario where Clique wasn't superior. I spent a long time after reading his article trying to rationalize how some of the hate bears are better than Clique, but ended up scrapping the idea. Every deck in Legacy has 4x Abrupt Decay or 4x Pyroblast at this point, and a blind Meddling Mage may accomplish nothing and trade with a Decay at your opponent's convenience. That's how I see it at least.

His analysis on Mentor maindeck:

Quote:

---

When I play Miracles, I have one thought running through my mind every turn of the game. That thought is to reduce as many outs to win the game as possible for my opponent. Every turn, I want to increase the number of weak or dead draws for them until I reach a battlefield where they simply are locked out from winning the game anymore. There are some decks, like 12-Post or MUD, where they actually have inevitability and you have to play the aggressor role, but for most decks, Miracles has the ultimate endgame, and it's important to play every turn toward that endgame. Take away as many options from them as possible, each and every turn.

Monastery Mentor in the maindeck is counterproductive to this style of game. The style of game that Monastery Mentor is looking to play is a lot more aggressive. With Monastery Mentor, you don't need to necessarily restrict your opponent's outs every turn of the game. You need to simply prevent them from winning long enough for Mentor to kill them.

That sounds well and good, except for one thing. Mentor falls short of killing them a lot. When that happens, you've expended all your resources into this one aggressive gameplan designed to kill them quickly, and now you're ill-equipped to win past that point. I'd rather just play a Miracles build that is singularly focused and every card is in the deck for the purpose of accomplishing one single goal, rather than these schizophrenic builds that try to take complete control of the game some of the time, but then try to turbo win with Mentor some other part of the time. These kinds of half and half measures never seem to really work out.

---

I only have Mentors sideboard, but this is exactly why I'm hesitant to try them main. After rereading Phillips explanation about how Mentor makes the deck play a bit more like Stoneblade, I think there's just a fundamental difference in playstyle/opinion. I called this way back in May, actually:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cipher

Everyone seems to be down to 2 Jaces. The miracles are a terrible with Dig, but give Jace half his strength. This whole progression seems to be happening slowly, but in the end I can see a Ponder/Dig CounterTop deck coming about that doesn't even run miracles. Mentor would be much stronger in that deck and you wouldn't lose it to Terminus.

---

...although I guess that "new version" won the GP a month later and that was the end of Dig. I can see people still pushing this envelope, with a hybrid of Chapin and Schonneger's decklists going down to 0 Entreat and maybe 2 Terminus, while running Mentor as opposed to Miracles as the additional payoffs for running Top.

I played two mentors yesterday, and was really happy with how they played out.

There's a lot of Young Pyromancer locally, which might make for them being slightly stronger than EtA, as you can actually get a strong board presence without having to waste terminus. I've found that the play of Mentor > a bunch of tokens > Entreat is an extremely strong line. (Happened twice, with me stabilising on like... 4 life against 6 tokens from him - Attacking into that, without two to lock the game up, wasn't really possible. Obviously, this doesn't happen often, but yeah).

Also, played 4 preordain over 4 ponder, and didn't mind it at all (My ponders are currently away for being altered, hence this :D).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cipher

Every deck in Legacy has 4x Abrupt Decay or 4x Pyroblast at this point, and a blind Meddling Mage may accomplish nothing and trade with a Decay at your opponent's convenience.

---

I thought Meddling Mage was for Abrupt Decay.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CutthroatCasual

I thought Meddling Mage was for Abrupt Decay.

---

Totally matchup dependent. Would you board in mage vs Shardless and name Decay?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dissection

Totally matchup dependent. Would you board in mage vs Shardless and name Decay?

---

That's my point. If you board them in, you almost have to name Decay, not the combo piece you really want to hit. How is boarding Mage in and naming Decay better than Clique against Storm?

I can't imagine boarding them in against Shardless is good, but I'm sure people would try it and I'm sure it sometimes works. I'm not a fan of committing even more to the Counter-Top soft lock when your opponent is boarding in even more cards to stop it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cipher

That's my point. If you board them in, you almost have to name Decay, not the combo piece you really want to hit. How is boarding Mage in and naming Decay better than Clique against Storm?

I can't imagine boarding them in against Shardless is good, but I'm sure people would try it and I'm sure it sometimes works. I'm not a fan of committing even more to the Counter-Top soft lock when your opponent is boarding in even more cards to stop it.

---

I totally agree with you, I was just trying to understand his point. I can't imagine Mage is good vs Shardless either.

Like you point out, decay deals with mage easily, so you want them in multiples ideally. Shardless runs a full set (it should, at least), as naming combo pieces followed up by another naming decay/pyroclasm can put a soft lock in place until they put the game away. I don't think Miracles has enough space in the SB to run a full set so their power drops in that sense. The combo matchup is much better for Miracles too..honestly, not a fan of MM myself at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cipher

He claimed Meddling Mage is better in the matchups you bring it in. His specific example was Sneak and Show where he says it can stop Boseju + Show and Tell on turn 2. I think he chose those numbers because he was hard pressed to come up with a scenario where Clique wasn't superior. I spent a long time after reading his article trying to rationalize how some of the hate bears are better than Clique, but ended up scrapping the idea. Every deck in Legacy has 4x Abrupt Decay or 4x Pyroblast at this point, and a blind Meddling Mage may accomplish nothing and trade with a Decay at your opponent's convenience. That's how I see it at least.

His analysis on Mentor maindeck:



I only have Mentors sideboard, but this is exactly why I'm hesitant to try them main. After rereading Phillips explanation about how Mentor makes the deck play a bit more like Stoneblade, I think there's just a fundamental difference in playstyle/opinion. I called this way back in May, actually:



...although I guess that "new version" won the GP a month later and that was the end of Dig. I can see people still pushing this envelope, with a hybrid of Chapin and Schonneger's decklists going down to 0 Entreat and maybe 2 Terminus, while running Mentor as opposed to Miracles as the additional payoffs for running Top.

---

Totally aligned with Cipher on this. i'm also prefer Mentors in the board, and instead having cliques mainboard. My rationale is that with 4 swords & 4 terminus, and XX Snapcasters, we are already in good shape against creature based decks.

What i want for my mainboard is a deck that has game against as wide a variety of decks as possible G1. Cliques help to improve matchups against both control & combo based decks, which are areas in which we are weaker at in G1. (as compared to Mentors)

Essentially, Phillip's List:

Mainboard
-2 Mentor
-1 Counterspell

+2 Cliques
+1 Terminus

With Regards to Hatebears, in most cases i still prefer Canonist to Meddling Mages.

I haven't had much practice with Miracles but I am wondering why do some people run any creatures beyond snapcaster/clique? I feel like I would rather have True Name than Mentor, and Clique or Snap instead of that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chaosjace

I haven't had much practice with Miracles but I am wondering why do some people run any creatures beyond snapcaster/clique? I feel like I would rather have True Name than Mentor, and Clique or Snap instead of that.

---

True-Name is literally useless in our deck.

Mentor ends the game so quick, once you have control - It can also help stabilise as well as provide a clock in other matches (MUD, 12-post, decks where Angels are way too slow).

Vensor is good versus Show and Tell, Stoneforge Mystic and incredible with Karakas.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quasim0ff

True-Name is literally useless in our deck.

Mentor ends the game so quick, once you have control - It can also help stabilise as well as provide a clock in other matches (MUD, 12-post, decks where Angels are way too slow).

Vensor is good versus Show and Tell, Stoneforge Mystic and incredible with Karakas.

---

But we aren't trying to end the game quickly, or not all of us are. I feel like in a control deck I Definately don't want to have to protect a creature by burning spells, if I was going to go Aggro, TNN protects himself at least.

I am also specifically talking about MD creatures, sorry. MD mentors seems to be popular.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chaosjace

But we aren't trying to end the game quickly, or not all of us are. I feel like in a control deck I Definately don't want to have to protect a creature by burning spells, if I was going to go Aggro, TNN protects himself at least.

I am also specifically talking about MD creatures, sorry. MD mentors seems to be popular.

---

Have you played Mentor?

True Name directly goes against the purpose of the deck. He is a 3/1 with 0 abilities, besides blocking. You want to play him early, otherwise he's even more useless.

If you don't like Mentor, EtA is still your best card. It's also much stronger vs BUG Decks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chaosjace

But we aren't trying to end the game quickly, or not all of us are. I feel like in a control deck I Definately don't want to have to protect a creature by burning spells, if I was going to go Aggro, TNN protects himself at least.

I am also specifically talking about MD creatures, sorry. MD mentors seems to be popular.

---

My thinking on mentor is is that he fills many roles.

He can act as a pseudo wrath in that your opponent won't attack into him and a few of his tokens for fear of losing their board.

He can kill troublesome planeswalkers that have the ability to protect themselves by making more guys at instant speed.

Finally, he can pretty much combo off and kill the opponent. One of the worst late game draws (arguably) is a second top. He turns that into a combo piece when he is on the board.

I agree that control decks don't want to use him to end a game early. But if we find out that we are not the control deck (when we play 12 post for example) then slamming him early becomes an option.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Misersoneof

My thinking on mentor is is that he fills many roles.

He can act as a pseudo wrath in that your opponent won't attack into him and a few of his tokens for fear of losing their board.

He can kill troublesome planeswalkers that have the ability to protect themselves by making more guys at instant speed.

Finally, he can pretty much combo off and kill the opponent. One of the worst late game draws (arguably) is a second top. He turns that into a combo piece when he is on the board.

I agree that control decks don't want to use him to end a game early. But if we find out that we are not the control deck (when we play 12 post for example) then slamming him early becomes an option.

---

Legacy is not as simple as dropping a Mentor to act as a pseudo wrath. Mentor and monks can't even block a Delver. How difficult can it be for a Delver player to hit you for 3 via air and then some direct damage like Bolt to the face to finish the game off? That's not to mention things like Inkmoth nexus, Creeping Tarpit, TNN. None of these care about Mentor blocking.

Mentor can kill planeswalker... only if it says on the board long enough, that's not a small task to ask. Most Miracle's fair deck opponents SB-out creature removal, but they do have plenty of them game one. For the sole purpose of killing planeswalker, Clique does a much better job for obvious reasons.

Most people would tell you that a resolved Mentor or a resolved EtA can finish the game at about equal speed, on average; sometimes EtA is actually faster, assuming it happens late game for both cards.

However, I totally disagree with BBD about SB-in Mentor. I actually want Mentor in the MD. At this point in time, if your 75 deck doesn't utilize artifact, you Need a justification for not having needle + null rod in your SB. Hence, in the SB games, your SDT gets locked out and you're under a threat's clocking. Now you draw into a Mentor, do you just jam Mentor and deplete your cantrips to generate as many monks as you can? Based on others and my experience, that's a dead end. You probably got 2 Monks, Mentor died to decay and so do rest of Monks at a later time. They probably got in for one attack for all the troubles.

Even if you run like 3 EtA or more win conditions, some have brought back the idea of Elspeth/Keranos. EtA is too clunky and most likely end up in the graveyard thanks to Hymn and Liliana, then you risk the card getting surgical-ed. Elspeth is generic enough but difficult to protect until you have enough soldier tokens. Keranos is simply too narrow. So, yes, most Shardless BUG builds will defeat Miracles, assuming the pilots know what they are doing. You could improve this MU by running Keranos, but it's a horrible win-con in other MU. All these post GP builds have Top-8 potentials, but I don't see them winning anything GP-sized, not anymore.

There are 2 pretty firm camps in this, as there has been since the card started seeing play in miracles: Pro-Mentor and Against-Mentor. Against mentor argues the same as you said, it doesn't go with our plan, isn't an effective wrath effective, and causes us to play differently. However, Pro-Mentor argues that sometimes we'll want to play differently. It's an extremely polarizing card and there is no doubt that it is extremely powerful. Whether you're playing it or not is a deckbuilding constraint and a playstyle difference, nothing more. One approach isn't arguably better than the other, it depends on metagame and personal preference more so than anything else. Hope this helps :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minniehajj

One approach isn't arguably better than the other, it depends on metagame and personal preference more so than anything else.

---

Good luck with that argument. I agree, but I've been saying this about decks for years. :tongue:

I think it's safe to say that TNN doesn't belong in this deck though, so regardless of whether you love Mentor in Miracles, you'd probably prefer it over TNN.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kirbysdl

Good luck with that argument. I agree, but I've been saying this about decks for years. :tongue:

I think it's safe to say that TNN doesn't belong in this deck though, so regardless of whether you love Mentor in Miracles, you'd probably prefer it over TNN.

---

Your signature makes me happy :)
And yeah, TNN is a thing to be feared when equipment is involved. It's MUCH worse than mentor.

So, this is the fourth try on this as I somehow ended up ranting more about some arguments that I read on the last two pages. This is not a pro or contra Mentor post, even if it sounds a lot like a pro one. It just seems to me that there are some misunderstandings and many people don't understand the card or why it's good the deck.
So, first things first.
The deck is not strong because it can Terminus at instant speed. Or because it can lock out opponents with Counter/Top. Other decks could also do that. It is strong because it can adapt to situations while using those tools in the most efficient way.
When do you want to see Entreat the Angels? With a huge amount of mana, when you have at least 4 untapped Lands (no Fetchland) and your opponent is resolving a Planeswalker and when you want to counter a CC3 spell with a Counterbalance. So while it's (undeniable) a strong wincondition, I don't want to see the card for most of the game - and that is the exact reason why I hate it. It's clunky and most of the time useless.
There are many posts regarding when to play Mentor, how much to commit to Mentor and what it does and doesn't do.
The nice thing is, those are wrong. Mentor shines because it's a high quality win condition that you can also use while you're durdling around in the midgame. The greatest missunderstanding lies in the commitment. No, you don't have to commit anything here. While those are corner cases, you can play Mentor turn 3 and I've done so often enough. While you can try to throw all your cantrips out there and create as many tokens as you want, you don't have to. Why not play one cantrip, keep open your counter and just attack for 3? Or without a trigger at all with one or two tokens.
It's a card that gives you another option to adapt to a gamestate, something which Clique and Snapcaster never could because if they block, they can't tell the tale.
The same thing counts for Terminus in that regard. There is a clear option here. Do you have a Mentor and the boardstate is favorable? Or are you able to make it favorable before you die? Uuuuuh, don't use Terminus then? Mentor isn't free, but the tokens are. So when the argument is that you lost a lot of creatures because of Terminus, you either missplayed Terminus or it was the right decision and you lost ONE creature. The same creature that could've been a Vendilion Clique. That one also gets hit by creature removal removal, just to get this argument out of the way, too.
To conclude, Mentor isn't the new messiah. It's worse than Clique in the regard of information and Planeswalker killing due to flash. It's worse than EtA in terms of pure power and endgame quality. To make up for it, it's almost never dead, gives you another angle of attack and the ability to tap for 3 mana once, then go along with your original gameplan while forcing your opponent to handle Mentor AND the stuff you play in your "free time" so it actually supports our gameplan pretty perfectly.
Bonus: It actually gives you a fighting chance against 12Post and destroys the mirrormatch.

Over the last month I've been playing a list with 3 Mentor and 0 EtA MD pretty succesfully, maybe losing 1 out of 3 or 1 out of 4 matches and have missed EtA maybe once or twice (in about 100 matches). And that was in situations where the game was absolutly unwinnable without it. I never wanted to see it in the other matches.

Also, strongly disagree with BBDs opinion on Spell Pierce. Miracles gets stronger the later in the game it gets, so a cheap counterspell is actually exactly what you want to have to survive the early game. It's dead in the lategame, but most of the time you won't need it then anyway.

So, I hope the explanation did somehow work as I intended it too. What I'm trying to say is basicly, widen your vision. It's what makes a good miracle player. And then you'll also see that the arguments against Mentor are pretty much made up. I can also see why you would want to play Clique though. Love that card.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mort-

It's a card that gives you another option to adapt to a gamestate, something which Clique and Snapcaster never could because if they block, they can't tell the tale.
The same thing counts for Terminus in that regard. There is a clear option here. Do you have a Mentor and the boardstate is favorable? Or are you able to make it favorable before you die? Uuuuuh, don't use Terminus then? Mentor isn't free, but the tokens are. So when the argument is that you lost a lot of creatures because of Terminus, you either missplayed Terminus or it was the right decision and you lost ONE creature. The same creature that could've been a Vendilion Clique. That one also gets hit by creature removal removal, just to get this argument out of the way, too.
To conclude, Mentor isn't the new messiah. It's worse than Clique in the regard of information and Planeswalker killing due to flash. It's worse than EtA in terms of pure power and endgame quality. To make up for it, it's almost never dead, gives you another angle of attack and the ability to tap for 3 mana once, then go along with your original gameplan while forcing your opponent to handle Mentor AND the stuff you play in your "free time" so it actually supports our gameplan pretty perfectly.
Bonus: It actually gives you a fighting chance against 12Post and destroys the mirrormatch.

Over the last month I've been playing a list with 3 Mentor and 0 EtA MD pretty succesfully, maybe losing 1 out of 3 or 1 out of 4 matches and have missed EtA maybe once or twice (in about 100 matches). And that was in situations where the game was absolutly unwinnable without it. I never wanted to see it in the other matches.

So, I hope the explanation did somehow work as I intended it too. What I'm trying to say is basicly, widen your vision. It's what makes a good miracle player. And then you'll also see that the arguments against Mentor are pretty much made up. I can also see why you would want to play Clique though. Love that card.

---

I agree with you completely. Mentor is helpful in a lot of situations but he also needs to be dealt with by the opponent.

Many times opponents become enamoured with an active mentor. They will force it or use up removal and then I am able to play my counter lock or Jace and can pull ahead. The fact that he can be cast as early as turn 3 gives him much more potential than Entreat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mort-

Also, strongly disagree with BBDs opinion on Spell Pierce. Miracles gets stronger the later in the game it gets, so a cheap counterspell is actually exactly what you want to have to survive the early game. It's dead in the lategame, but most of the time you won't need it then anyway.

---

Perhaps Lightning Bolts in place of Terminus will also turn out to be much more effective in Counter-Top decks that replace miracles with Mentors. Seriously; you should give it a shot. Mentor becomes even more reliable and you diminish your ability to stop what? Elves? You can even cut Jace entirely and run the full playset of Snapcasters. Without the expensive top end you can cut even more lands.

Any tips on the shardless matchup? Seems to be one that gives me the most trouble.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ltj999

Any tips on the shardless matchup? Seems to be one that gives me the most trouble.

---

Keranos, Gott der Stürme and Blutmond.

Also, Board out Willenskraft (and Gegengewicht, if you're into that kind of stuff) for Cliques, Wirrsturm, Roter Urknall (For Jace, Vision, Tar Pit). Perhaps consider Lähnumsnadel.

Verschleiss//Abnutzung is also a consideration, due to Waldesbibliothek as well as Stab des Nichts and Lähnumsnadel from them.

Depending if you like Gegengewichts or not, In Frieden Ruhen is also a consideration. Depends if you want to blank their Abrupter Verfall or not.

@Mort: I'm trying your list today, with -1 Jace +1 REB maindeck, as well as -1 Judgement +1 Gegenzauber.


Also: German cards best cards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quasim0ff

Keranos, Gott der Stürme and Blutmond.

Also, Board out Willenskraft (and Gegengewicht, if you're into that kind of stuff) for Cliques, Wirrsturm, Roter Urknall (For Jace, Vision, Tar Pit). Perhaps consider Lähnumsnadel.

Verschleiss//Abnutzung is also a consideration, due to Waldesbibliothek as well as Stab des Nichts and Lähnumsnadel from them.

Depending if you like Gegengewichts or not, In Frieden Ruhen is also a consideration. Depends if you want to blank their Abrupter Verfall or not.

@Mort: I'm trying your list today, with -1 Jace +1 REB maindeck, as well as -1 Judgement +1 Gegenzauber.

---

I can't decide if this is the best or worst post in the thread. XD Let me take a crack at this...

Keranos, God of Storms and Blood Moon.

Board out Force of Will (and... Counterbalance?), board in Cliques, Flusterstorm and REB.

Wear//Tear against Sylvan Library, Pithing Needle, and... Null Rod?

If you like CB, maybe Rest in Peace?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PhyrexianLibrarian

I can't decide if this is the best or worst post in the thread. XD Let me take a crack at this...

Keranos, God of Storms and Blood Moon.

Board out Force of Will (and... Counterbalance?), board in Cliques, Flusterstorm and REB.

Wear//Tear against Sylvan Library, Pithing Needle, and... Null Rod?

If you like CB, maybe Rest in Peace?

---

Nailed it. :)

I was hoping he would work a little for it, since he can't go two pages back, at least...